ORIGINAL RESEARCH

published: 03 August 2018

doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2018.00030

The Effect of Online Social Proof

Regarding Organic Food: Comments
and Likes on Facebook
Femke Hilverda 1,2*, Margôt Kuttschreuter 2 and Ellen Giebels 2
1
Athena Institute for Research on Innovation and Communication in Health and Life Sciences, VU University Amsterdam,
Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2 Department of Psychology of Conflict, Risk and Safety, University of Twente, Enschede,
Netherlands

Social media created a new information environment (e.g., Rutsaert et al., 2013b). Among
social media channels, Facebook is the most popular one (Cheung et al., 2011). Using
Facebook people can exchange information rapidly with others. Consumers can post a
statement or message on Facebook (a post), respond to these posts (the comments),
Edited by:
and indicate that they agree with the post and/or comment by using the “thumb up”
Rukhsana Ahmed,
University of Ottawa, Canada symbol (the likes). Both comments and likes are cues of social proof, e.g., the viewpoints
Reviewed by: of others. We investigated how social proof in an online environment impacts reactions
Yuping Mao, toward organic foods in two experimental studies. In study 1, using a representative
California State University, Long
Beach, United States
sample of Dutch internet users (n = 124), we manipulated comment valence (positive vs.
Isaac Nahon-Serfaty, negative) and reinforcement (number of likes: high vs. low) on a fictitious Facebook page
University of Ottawa, Canada
that included four comments. Consumers’ perceptions, feelings, and behavior, such as
*Correspondence:
risk perception, emotions and intended purchasing behavior, were measured. Comment
Femke Hilverda
m.d.hilverda@vu.nl evaluation was used as a moderator. In study 2 (n = 88) a full Facebook page, with
mixed valence statements, was shown; either the positive or negative statements were
Specialty section: reinforced by likes. Results of study 1 showed that the way respondents evaluated the
This article was submitted to
Health Communication, comments in terms of usefulness affected benefit perception and the motivation to find
a section of the journal information. Moreover, the interaction between valence and comment evaluation was
Frontiers in Communication
significant for all dependent variables. That is, the predicted effect of social proof only
Received: 20 October 2017
occurred when the comments were perceived as useful. The number of likes did not
Accepted: 15 June 2018
Published: 03 August 2018 have an effect. Results of study 2 where participants watched a full Facebook page with
Citation: mixed valence comments, showed that the number of likes had an effect on consumers’
Hilverda F, Kuttschreuter M and reactions, specifically on negative emotions and willingness to pay. This research provides
Giebels E (2018) The Effect of Online
Social Proof Regarding Organic Food:
new insights in the effects of explicit as well as implicit online social proof on attitudes
Comments and Likes on Facebook. toward a positively evaluated topic, namely organic food.
Front. Commun. 3:30.
doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2018.00030 Keywords: social media, Facebook, social proof, organic food, comments, likes

Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org 1 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30

Hilverda et al.
INTRODUCTION
The rise of social media provides new opportunities to
organizations (Galvez-Rodriguez et al., 2016), and more specific
to communicators of food risks (Rutsaert et al., 2013b, 2014), or
chronic diseases (Santoro et al., 2015), for example. Advantages of
using social media to disseminate information are, for instance,
speed and accessibility (Rutsaert et al., 2014). Social media
also empower consumers to interact with other consumers and
express their own opinion (Shao, 2009), resulting in an increase
of public involvement and interaction (Rutsaert et al., 2013b).
Consumers can also use social media as a source of information.
They have to make sense of this information and consequently
decide how to act. This raises the question to what extent
consumers are influenced by online cues that signal the views of
others with respect to food risk issues, such as online comments
and the number of likes at a statement.
Generally, the Internet is becoming one of the main sources
of health information (Dutta-Bergman, 2004; Redmond and
Griffith, 2006; Tian and Robinson, 2008; Jacob et al., 2010;
Kuttschreuter et al., 2014). In the early days, the Internet was
primarily used to search for and check information. Nowadays
it has changed into a dynamic information environment of social
media, where almost anyone can post messages, and spread or
comment on information rapidly (Horst et al., 2007). This results
in an abundance of facts and viewpoints on a particular topic,
which might be both helpful and confusing to Internet users.
When searching for information on the Internet, it is quite
possible that consumers consult a social media website including
Facebook and Twitter (Giustini, 2006), rather than a more
traditional website of an official information body (Rutsaert
et al., 2013a,b). Consumers may use this information to form
an opinion. According to Cialdini’s principle of social proof
(Cialdini, 2001), in ambiguous situations where consumers are
uncertain about an appropriate course of action, they may adjust
to the viewpoints and behaviors of others whom they assume to
be more knowledgeable in dealing with the particular situation.
Social media information might serve this purpose.
Facebook, the most popular social media channel (Cheung
et al., 2011), is one of the platforms for information exchange,
gaining popularity over the last years. Facebook members use
Facebook to spread (personal) information to their friends or,
depending on their privacy settings, to a broader audience
(Kirschner, 2015). Consumers can post a statement or message
on Facebook (a post), respond to these posts (the comments), and
indicate that they agree with the post and/or comment by using
the “thumb up” symbol (the likes). Facebook usage is not only
associated with interpersonal communication and maintaining
relationships (Cheung et al., 2011), consumers also use Facebook
to seek and respond to information (Basilisco and Cha, 2015). In
particular, consumers search on Facebook for consumer trends
information (Asghar, 2015). Organizations communicating on
food issues have responded to this by using Facebook to link with
consumers and inform them about (food) issues.
The current research aims to investigate to what extent
consumers are susceptible to social proof in an online
environment (online social proof). Focusing on organic food, we
Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org
Social Proof on Facebook
examined the research question: “To what extent do comments
and likes on Facebook influence consumers’ perceptions, feelings
and behavior?”
While previous research on online social proof mainly focused
on topics on which consumers generally hold negative attitudes,
such as smoking (Walther et al., 2010; Shi et al., 2014), our
research focused on a topic that is generally viewed as positive,
namely organic food products. Food is something that is relevant
to all of us, as we all have to eat. This makes the focus on organic
food both interesting and important.
In two experimental studies involving a fictitious Facebook
page on organic food products, we manipulated social proof by
varying the comment valence and reinforcement (the number
of likes), and examined the effect on perceptions, feelings, and
intended purchasing behavior.
An innovative aspect of our research is that the combined
effect of comments and likes were studied. The design of the
two studies allowed us to both disentangle these effects and make
statements about their combined effect as well.
THEORY
Online Social Proof: Comments,
Narratives, and Other Explicit Cues
According to Cialdini (2001), one of the most influential social
influence mechanisms is the principle of social proof. This
principle is based on the heuristic that consumers follow the
lead of similar others when uncertain about an adequate course
of action (Cialdini, 2001; Okdie et al., 2013). Basically, the idea
is that when a consumer takes a certain course of action that
complies with that of many similar others, the risk of making a
wrong decision decreases (Lee et al., 2008).
As the Internet is becoming more popular, new forms of social
proof arise. For example, there are reviews, narratives, personal
blogs, and opinion pages available online. These can be used as
indicators of the way in which similar others perceive a certain
topic and can in principle create, change or adjust opinions. One
of the key aspects of online social proof is its valence: positivity
(being pro) or negativity (being against).
Several studies have demonstrated the impact of positive
and negative online reactions of other consumers on behavior
(Winterbottom et al., 2008), and attitudes (Vermeulen and
Seegers, 2009). Vermeulen and Seegers (2009), for example,
investigated the effects of online hotel reviews on attitudes toward
hotels. While both positive and negative reviews increased
awareness of specific hotels, they—not surprisingly—also found
that reading positive reviews was associated with more favorable
attitudes toward hotels than reading negative reviews.
Although the impact of exposure to solely negative or solely
positive online social proof has been studied extensively, in reality
it is more likely that consumers are exposed to both positive and
negative opinions from different sources at the same time (Lee
et al., 2008). In line with this presumption, a study on vaccination
focused on the proportion of online narratives (peer comments)
that reported adverse consequences (Betsch et al., 2011). They
found that the higher the proportion of negative narratives, the
2 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30
Hilverda et al.
more the risk perception increased, which in turn led to a lower
intention to vaccinate.
Building on these results, Kause et al. (2014) performed a
study in which they systematically varied the proportion of
negative and positive narratives about flu vaccination (ratio
of positive comments: 0, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, and 1.00). Results
revealed only one significant post-hoc effect between conditions:
the intention to vaccinate differed between the participants
who received only negative comments and those who received
only positive ones. That is, the participants who viewed only
positive comments were more inclined to vaccinate compared to
those who viewed only negative comments. Similar results were
obtained in a recent study by Seo et al. (2015) who examined
the effect of Facebook comments on food safety information
regarding restaurants. With the proportion of positive comments
varying between 0, 0.50, and 1.00, this study showed that the
higher the proportion of positive comments, the lower the level
of risk perception related to eating in the advertised restaurant.
Similar studies have found evidence for an effect of online
social proof by means of Facebook comments in different
contexts, varying from breastfeeding attitudes (Jin et al., 2015),
to marihuana legalization (Winter et al., 2015), and brand
engagement and sales (Kim and Johnson, 2016). Furthermore,
the empirical evidence for the effect of (online) social proof is not
restricted to Facebook. Studies have also shown the effect of social
proof on YouTube, for example in relation to smoking behavior
(Walther et al., 2010; Shi et al., 2014).
Apart from the specific context or type of online social proof,
it remains unclear what happens when positive and negative
comments are presented together in a way that makes the
information in the comments inconclusive. This is, for example,
the case when there are as many consumers who are in favor
of a particular activity as consumers who are against it. When
consumers cannot draw conclusions from explicit cues of online
social proof, such as the comments, they might start to look at
other pieces of information, such as the number of likes.
Subtitle Cues of Online Social Proof
When explicit expressions of social proof such as comments
are unavailable or contradictory consumers might look at more
subtle cues of social proof. Research supports this idea. Amblee
and Bui (2011) conducted a study on online reviews of short e-
books. They showed that consumers focused their attention on
the book reviews rather than on the author ratings. When there
were no reviews available, however, consumers switched their
attention toward the author ratings. This thus suggests that when
explicit cues are missing, consumers might turn to other, more
subtle cues.
This effect may hold for other implicit cues of social proof,
such as the number of likes at Facebook comments and the
number of downloads on iTunes. Consumers may view these
subtle cues as endorsements: Likes indicate that there is a lot of
interest and support and are thus likely to influence consumers’
behavior (Muscanell et al., 2014). In support of this reasoning,
likes on Facebook have been found to positively influence sales
rates of products (Lee et al., 2015).
Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org
Social Proof on Facebook
Previous research into the effect of likes on Facebook on
attitudes showed mixed results. Jin et al. (2015) found evidence
for the importance of the number of likes on pro-breastfeeding
attitudes. In contrast, other research showed that the subtle cue of
the number of likes of a comment did not influence consumers’
attitudes (Peter et al., 2014; Winter et al., 2015). These studies
used the exemplification theory (Zillmann, 2002) to explain the
non-significant effect of the number of likes: Consumers are more
easily influenced by exemplifying statements than user statistics,
such as the number of likes. While Peter et al. (2014) did not find
an effect of comment likes, their results indicated an effect of post
likes on the attitude toward flue vaccination. Concluding, there
is some evidence indicating that likes have an effect of consumer
attitudes, but results are inconclusive.
Social Proof by Social Media and Organic
Food Products
An open question is whether social proof is effective in the case
of organically grown food products. Previous research already
showed the importance of perceptions of peers’ health concerns
on healthy food choice (Muturi et al., 2016). Organic food
products match a general preference for naturalness and foods
produced without human intervention (Rozin et al., 2004; Shafie
and Rennie, 2012). Research shows that consumers consider
organic foods to have advantages over conventional foods (Hay,
1989; Schifferstein and Ophuis, 1998; Grankvist and Biel, 2001,
2007; Roitner-Schobesberger et al., 2008), while they also perceive
organic foods to be less risky than conventional food (Hammitt,
1990). Specifically, the risk of microbiological contamination and
natural toxins is considered to be very small compared to the
risks of pesticide use (Williams and Hammitt, 2001). At the same
time, the very absence of pesticides makes these products more
prone to bacterial contamination. This might encourage food risk
communicators to advice the general public on such risks, but
at the same time also create uncertainty among consumers and
make them more susceptible to social proof.
In many countries around the world, including the
Netherlands where this study was conducted, organic food
is becoming more popular and available (Giraud, 2002; Hughner
et al., 2007; FoodHolland, 2016). In 2014, the Dutch organic
food market had a total share of 3% of the food market and
the sales increased with more than 10% (FoodHolland, 2016).
This implies that, though the Dutch consumers are positive
about organic food, this is not reflected in their buying behavior.
Research shows that Dutch consumers associate organic food
products the most with animal welfare, price, health, and
naturalness (Hilverda et al., 2016). Overall, the attitude regarding
organic products in the Netherlands is moderately positive
(Hilverda et al., 2017). Dutch authorities are also positive about
organic production techniques and are funding new initiatives
(Bionext, 2017). Dutch newspapers have, however, also reported
on scientific research that casts doubts on the claims that organic
products are more healthy and better for the environment (www.
nu.nl). Consumers consequently have to make up their minds
regarding purchasing and consuming those products. This
decision is not that simple, however, as it involves the weighing
3 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30
Hilverda et al.
of the risks and benefits of such products from a health as well
as environmental perspective. In such uncertain situations, and
following the social proof principle, consumers might be inclined
to follow the lead of similar others.
Evaluation of the Comments
When testing effects of comment valence on attitudes, it seems
important to take the consumer’s evaluation of the comments
into account. Slater and Rouner (1996) argue that the evaluation
of a message has an effect on source credibility and in turn
influences message acceptance and belief change. In a similar
vein, a recent study by Lee and Shin (2014) showed that the
quality of online reviews had an impact on product evaluations
and purchase intentions. These findings suggest that consumers
who perceive the comments to be clearer and more valuable are
more likely to be influenced by them in such a way that positive
Facebook comments lead to more positive reactions, while
negative comments lead to more negative reactions. Consumers
who perceive the comments as unclear might not be influenced
by them, or effects might even be reversed.
The Current Studies
Based on the previous discussion we examined two types of
social proof on Facebook pages, namely the comments’ valence
(positive vs. negative) and reinforcement (a high vs. low number
of likes placed below these comments). Both the valence of the
comments and the number of likes are viewed as a form of social
proof as they show the opinion of others, with comments being
more explicit and likes more implicit. The first experiment was
designed to test the main and interaction effects of the number of
likes associated with comments with the same valence, whereas
the second experiment was designed to examine the effect of the
number of likes when the valence of the comments is mixed.
In study 1, we thus examined the effect of the two types of
online social proof on perceptions, feelings and behavior toward
organic food. The evaluation of the comments was included as
a moderator. By performing this first experiment we wanted
to study how comments and likes interact to affect consumers’
perceptions, feelings and behavior. After that, we wanted to
replicate the experiment in a more realistic setting. In real
life consumers are often exposed to both positive and negative
opinions from different sources at the same time (Lee et al., 2008).
Following the reasoning that likes might only become relevant
when the valence of the comments is mixed, we examined the
effect of the number of likes on a mixed valence Facebook page in
study 2.
STUDY 1: THE INTERPLAY OF COMMENTS
AND LIKES ON FACEBOOK
Hypotheses
In study 1 we tested to what extent consumers were influenced
by comments as well as likes on Facebook. In this 2x2 study,
the valence of the comments (positive vs. negative) and the
reinforcement (high vs. low number of likes) were manipulated.
It was first examined whether the levels of comment valence
affected perceptions, feelings, and behavioral intentions. In line
Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org
Social Proof on Facebook
with the mechanism of social proof, it was assumed that
consumers use the information from the comments and likes as
a heuristic cue to constitute the appropriate action. When others
express a positive rather than negative opinion in the comments,
this is expected to influence consumers’ attitudes toward organic
food in a positive way. Based on previous studies on online social
proof (e.g., Jin et al., 2015; Winter et al., 2015; Kim and Johnson,
2016), it was predicted that:
H1: There is a main effect of comment valence: positive comments
lead to more positive perceptions, feelings, and behavioral
intentions towards organic food products than negative comments.
Subsequently, the effects of the number of likes and the
interaction between valence and the number of likes were
examined. The main effect of the number of likes, i.e.,
reinforcement, was examined, even though in some previous
studies on the number of likes (e.g., Peter et al., 2014; Winter
et al., 2015) no evidence for this effect was found. In addition,
the possibility that the number of likes might boost the effect of
the comments was tested. The following hypotheses were tested:
H2: There is a significant main effect of reinforcement: The higher
the number of likes, the more positive the perceptions, feelings, and
behavioral intentions towards organic food.
H3: There is an interaction effect of valence and reinforcement: The
number of likes strengthens the effect of the comments.
Following the research of Slater and Rouner (1996), the
evaluation of the comments was included as a variable predicting
both a main and a moderator effect:
H4: There is a main effect of the evaluation of the comments in
terms of clearness and usefulness on the dependent variables.
H5: There is an interaction effect of comment valence with the
evaluation of the comments in such a way that the effect of comment
valence on perceptions, feelings, and behavioral intentions towards
organic food products is stronger when the comments are perceived
as more clear and useful.
Materials and Methods
Participants
A total of 241 participants recruited by a certified research
agency completed an online experiment, which took them about
15 min. The research agency acted in accordance with the ethical
standards of the institutional research committee. The protocol of
this experimental study was approved by the Ethics Committee
of the Faculty of Behavioral, Management and Social sciences,
University of Twente, the Netherlands. All subjects provided
informed consent to the agency. As a total of 97% of the
Dutch population uses the Internet (CBS) and there is not
much variation between SES-groups, recruitment was stratified
on age and gender. The sample was representative of the Dutch
population of Internet users with respect to age and gender.
Only participants who correctly filled out both manipulation
4 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30
Hilverda et al.
check questions were included in the analyses1 . This resulted
in a total sample of 124 participants. There were no differences
with respect to age and gender between the final sample and the
drop-outs.
Participants were 48 years old on average (SD = 16.62).
The sample consisted of 65 males (52%) and 59 females (48%).
All of them were familiar with Facebook. A randomization
check showed that there were no differences between conditions
with respect to gender, age, initial knowledge, and initial risk
and benefit perception of organic food. Differences between
conditions on the dependent variables can therefore be attributed
to our manipulations.
Design and Manipulation
We used a 2 (comment valence: positive vs. negative) x 2
(reinforcement: high vs. low number of likes) between subjects
design to test the hypotheses. Participants were randomly
assigned to one of the four conditions (npositive−high = 44,
npositive−low = 18, nnegative−high = 47, and npositive−low = 15).
Participants viewed a Facebook image with four comments
(see Figure 1). The valence of these comments varied. A pilot
study was conducted among students to select comments that
were content-wise identical while different with respect to
valence. The comments with the largest contrast were selected,
provided the participants perceived the comments to be realistic
Facebook statements.
Comment valence was manipulated by varying the appraisal
aspect of the comments: in the positive condition all comments
were positive; in the negative condition all comments were
negative. Reinforcement was manipulated by varying the number
of likes: either a high or low number of likes was given to the
comments. To determine the amount of high and low number
of likes accompanying comments, popular Facebook pages were
visited and materials from previous studies focusing on the effect
of likes were considered. Based on these numbers, we included
less than 20 likes in the low reinforcement condition, and over
200 likes in the high reinforcement condition.
Measures
All items of study 1 and 2 are shown in Table 1.
Perceptions
Three measures of perceptions were used. To measure personal
health risk perception, participants indicated whether they
considered eating organic to be unhealthy (4 items; α = 0.93; 7-
point-Likert scale; 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree).
We measured benefit perception regarding one’s own health
with four statements about eating organic food being healthy
(4 items; α = 0.90, 7-point-Likert scale, 1 = strongly disagree
to 7 = strongly agree). Participants also indicated on a 7-point
semantic differential-type scale (Osgood et al., 1957) what their
1 A total of 97% participants correctly filled out the manipulation check question
about the valence of the comments (92% in the positive condition and 94% in the
negative condition).
A total of 52% participants correctly filled out the manipulation check question
about the number of likes (76% in the many likes condition and 28% in the few
likes condition).
Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org
Social Proof on Facebook
overall attitude of eating organic was. Three item-pairs were
used (α = 0.82): negative-positive, bad-good, and bad for my
health-beneficial for my health.
Feelings
We measured emotions by asking participants to what extent
they experienced anxiety (anxious, concerned, afraid and
worried; α = 0.94) and positive emotions (happy, positive,
satisfied, optimistic; α = 0.97) when thinking about eating
organic food. Items were measured on a 7-point scale from
1 = not at all to 7= very much.
Behavioral predictors
Two behavioral predictors were measured: motivation to find
information and willingness to buy. Participants filled out whether
they wanted to know more about organic food (4 items; α = 91;
7-point scale; 1= strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree). As
research showed that consumer attitudes are more reliably
measured and more predictive of behavior when focusing on
specific food products rather than broad product categories
(Bredahl, 1999), willingness to buy was measured by asking the
participants to what extent they were inclined to buy 7 organic
food products (7-point scale, ranging from 1 = not at all to 7 =
very much; adapted from Makatouni, 2002; α = 0.96).
Comment evaluation
We measured participants’ evaluation of the Facebook comments
with three statements about their clearness, usefulness in
contribution to an advice for a friend and whether they discussed
important aspects of organic products (3 items; α = 0.67, 7-point-
Likert scale, 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree).
Procedure
Participants were requested to fill out an online questionnaire
about new food production methods. A request for advice
by a friend on purchasing organic food was used as a cover
story to increase involvement. After filling out the questions
about their initial knowledge and perceptions regarding organic
food, participants viewed the Facebook image. The participants,
then, indicated what they thought about the discussion
on Facebook, and filled out the two manipulation check
questions. The dependent variables were then measured. At
the end, the participants answered questions about their socio-
demographics and their online media use, and were thanked
for their participation. During the entire data collection period,
participants could contact the helpdesk of the research agency for
questions and debriefing.
Results Study 1
Means and Correlations
Table 2 reports the means, standard deviation, reliabilities, and
correlations of the constructs. Risk perception and anxiety
were relatively low, while benefit perception and attitude were
quite high. Positive emotions, motivation to find information,
willingness to buy and the evaluation of the comments all scored
somewhat above the midpoint of the scale.
Risk perception and benefit perception were negatively
associated. While risk perception correlated positively with
5 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30
Hilverda et al.
FIGURE 1 | Facebook pictures study 1 in English (translated from Dutch) (Left) positive valence + high number of likes; (Right) negative valence + low number of
likes.
anxiety and negatively with overall attitude, positive emotions,
and willingness to buy, the opposite was true for benefit
perception. Furthermore, while benefit perception was positively
related to motivation to find information, risk perception was
unrelated to it. The overall attitude and positive emotions showed
similar correlation patterns as benefit perception, although
the correlations between attitude and the motivation to find
information, and between positive emotions and anxiety were not
significant. Anxiety was negatively correlated with willingness to
buy; the more anxiety, the less willingness to buy. Finally, the
evaluation of the comments in terms of clearness and usefulness
was only positively related to the motivation to find information.
Hypotheses Testing
A MANCOVA was performed to test the main effects of valence
and reinforcement, and their interaction on the six dependent
variables jointly, including the evaluation of the comments
as a moderator variable (centered around the mean). This
MANCOVA was followed by separate ANCOVAs for each of the
dependent variables.
There were no statistically significant multivariate effects of
valence (H1), reinforcement (H2), and the interaction between
valence and reinforcement (H3), all p’s> 0.05. These results are
in contrast with H1, H2, and H3 that predicted a significant effect
of valence, reinforcement and an interaction effect.
There was a significant multivariate effect of the evaluation of
the Facebook comments (H4), F (7,112) = 3.55, p = 0.002; Wilk’s
λ = 0.82, partial η2 = 0.18. Univariate analysis showed that
this effect only held for benefit perception, F (1, 118) = 7.21, p
= 0.008, and motivation to find information, F (1, 118) = 14.40,
p < 0.001. In line with hypothesis 4, it was found that the more
clear and useful the comments were perceived to be, the more
benefits participants perceived and the more motivated they were
to find additional information. The multivariate interaction of
valence and the evaluation of the comments was also significant,
F (7,112) = 5.60, p < 0.001; Wilk’s λ = 0.74, partial η2 = 0.26.
Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org
Social Proof on Facebook
Univariate analysis showed that this effect held for all dependent
variables: risk perception, F (1, 118) = 7.29, p = 0.008, benefit
perception, F (1, 118) = 20.21, p < 0.001, attitude, F (1, 118) = 6.13,
p = 0.015, anxiety, F (1, 118) = 13.87, p < 0.001, positive emotions,
F (1, 118) = 14.28, p < 0.001, motivation to find information,
F (1, 118) = 8.09, p = 0.005, and willingness to buy, F (1, 118) = 5.66,
p = 0.019. Figure 2 shows the interaction effect of valence and
comment evaluation on risk perception. It shows that the more
positive the evaluation of the comments, the stronger the effect of
valence in the expected direction. Similar patterns are found for
anxiety and (reversed) for the other dependent variables. These
results are in line with hypothesis 5 and confirm the moderating
role of comment evaluation. Please see Table 3 with the means
per condition, including corresponding F- and p-values.
STUDY 2: THE FULL FACEBOOK PAGE
In study 2 we focused on the effect of reinforcement in
terms of Facebook likes when consumers are exposed to both
positive and negative opinions from different sources at the
same time. The participants were shown a fictitious Facebook
page with multiple posts and comments about eating organic
foods, in which either the positive or the negative statements
were reinforced by a high number of likes. Positive comments
stressed that the absence of pesticides (which are used in
traditional agriculture) improves the healthiness of organic food,
while negative comments emphasized that organic foods are
not always pesticide-free and that consumers underestimate the
risks of organic products, such as bacterial contamination. Based
on the study by Amblee and Bui (2011), who showed that
consumers switch their attention to implicit social proof when
explicit social proof is missing, we expected that participants in
the condition where positive comments were reinforced were
overall more positive about organic products than participants
in the condition where negative comments were reinforced. The
following hypotheses were tested:
6 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30
Hilverda et al. Social Proof on Facebook

TABLE 1 | Scales, items, and reliabilities of constructs from study 1 and study 2.

Measures Characteristics

Scale Reliability

STUDY 1 (n = 124)
Perceptions Personal health risk perception 7-point Likert scale from 0.93
1. I think that organic food is bad for my health 1 = strongly disagree to
2. I think that there are many risks attached to organic food 7 = strongly agree
3. I think that organic food has many disadvantages
4. I think that organic food is dangerous for my health

Personal health benefit perception 7-point Likert scale from 0.90

1. I think that organic food is good for my health 1 = strongly disagree to
2. I think that there are many benefits attached to organic food 7 = strongly agree
3. I think that organic food has many advantages
4. I think that organic food is beneficial for my health

Attitude 7-point semantic differential-type 0.82

Overall, how do you think about organic food products? scale
1. Negative–positive
2. Bad–good
3. Bad for my health–good for my health

Feelings Anxiety 7-point scale from 1 = not at all 0.94

When I think about eating organic food products, I feel.. to
1. Anxious 7 = very much
2. Concerned
3. Afraid
4. Worried

Positive emotions 7-point scale from 1 = not at all 0.97

When I think about eating organic food products, I feel.. to
1. Happy 7 = very much
2. Positive
3. Satisfied
4. Optimistic

Behavioral predictors
Motivation to find information 7-point Likert scale from 0.91
I would like to know more about… 1 = strongly disagree to
1. the advantages and disadvantages of eating organic food products 7 = strongly agree
2. the most important differences between organic and non-organic food
3. how I can recognize an organic product
4. the laws on organic food production

Willingness to buy 7-point Likert scale from 1 = not 0.96

Imagine you want to buy the following products. How likely is it that you’ll at all to 7 = very much
buy the organic option?
1. An apple
2. Carrots
3. Meat products
4. Bread
5. Pasta
6. Eggs
7. Yogurt

Additional measures Comment evaluation 7-point Likert scale from 0.67

1. I think that the viewpoints in the comments are clear 1 = strongly disagree to
2. I think that the comments discuss important aspects in relation to 7 = strongly agree
organic food
3. I can use these comments to advice a friend about eating organic food
STUDY 2 (n = 88)
Perceptions Risk perception of pesticide use
1. Pesticides are harmful for people
2. Pesticides have long-term consequences for humans
3. Pesticides have severe consequences for mankind
4. Pesticides are harmful for animals

(Continued)

Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org 7 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30

Hilverda et al. Social Proof on Facebook

TABLE 1 | Continued

Measures Characteristics

Scale Reliability

5. Pesticides have long-term consequences for animals 5-point scale from 1 = strongly 0.94
6. Pesticides have severe consequences for animals disagree to 5 = strongly agree
7. Pesticides are harmful for the environment
8. Pesticides have long-term consequences for the environment
9. Pesticides have severe consequences for the environment

Benefit perception 5-point scale from 1 = strongly 0.86

1. Organic food contains more vitamins than non-organic food disagree to 5 = strongly agree
2. I believe that eating organic food is riskless
3. Organic food helps fighting obesity
4. An organic apple is healthier than a non-organic apple
5. Organic food is richer in nutrients than non-organic food
6. Organic food helps me to relax
7. I trust that organic food is healthy for me
8. Organic food is good for the immune system
9. I am confident that organic food is safe
10. Organic food has a positive impact on a person’s well-being
11. Organic food is better for the skin than non-organic food
12. Organic food helps me to cope with stress

Feelings Anxiety 5-point scale from 1 = not at all 0.80

When I think about eating organic food products, I feel.. to 5 = very much
1. Anxious
2. Concerned
3. Hopeless
4. Pessimistic

Positive emotions 5-point scale from 1 = not at all 0.94

When I think about eating organic food products, I feel.. to 5 = very much
1. Happy
2. Positive
3. Satisfied
4. in a good mood

Behavioral predictors
Motivation to find information 5-point scale from 1 = strongly 0.77
1. I would like to know more about how I can recognize an organic product disagree to
2. I would like to know more about the advantages and disadvantages of 5 = strongly agree
eating organic food products
3. I would like to know more about the laws on organic food production
4. I would like to know more about the most important differences between
organic and non-organic food

Willingness to pay Difference in eurocents was used n.a.

1. How much would you be willing to pay for an organic apple? in the analysis
2. How much would you be willing to pay for a non-organic apple?

TABLE 2 | Means, standard deviations, reliabilities, and correlations between all constructs—study 1 (n =184).

Constructs Mean sd α Correlations

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

1. Personal health risk perception 2.76 1.14 0.93 1

2. Personal health benefit perception 4.80 1.02 0.90 −0.66** 1
3. Attitude 4.78 1.33 0.82 −0.52** 0.66** 1
4. Anxiety 2.02 1.21 0.94 0.50** −0.37** −0.33** 1
5. Positive emotions 4.14 1.68 0.97 −0.46** 0.68** 0.55** −0.13 1
6. Motivation to find information 4.45 1.24 0.91 0.02 0.35** 0.14 0.001 0.29** 1
7. Willingness to buy 4.20 1.65 0.96 −0.48** 0.73** 0.60** −0.22* 0.70** 0.41** 1
8. Evaluation comments 4.22 1.09 0.67 0.04 0.14 −0.05 0.01 0.05 0.27** 0.11 1

All constructs were measured on a 7-point Likert scale. *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org 8 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30

Hilverda et al. Social Proof on Facebook

FIGURE 2 | Interaction effect of comment evaluation and valence on risk perception.

TABLE 3 | Testing H1-H5: Main effect of valence, main effect likes and interaction, including evaluation as moderator—study 1 (n = 124).

Constructs Positive Negative H1 Valence H2 Likes H3 Interaction H4 Evaluation H5

condition condition comments Moderation

Many Few Many Few F Sig F Sig F Sig F Sig F Sig

likes likes likes likes

1. Personal health 2.63 2.57 2.95 2.83 1.82 0.18 0.23 0.63 0.004 0.95 0.07 0.79 7.29 0.008
risk perception
2. Personal health 4.79 4.82 4.81 4.75 0.24 0.63 0.04 0.85 0.24 0.63 7.21 0.01 20.21 <0.001
benefit perception
3. Attitude 4.75 4.96 4.68 4.93 0.05 0.82 0.94 0.34 <0.001 0.997 0.006 0.94 6.13 0.02
4. Anxiety 1.89 2.01 2.14 2.05 0.29 0.59 0.01 0.93 0.11 0.74 0.15 0.70 13.87 <0.001
5. Positive emotions 4.04 4.76 4.16 3.58 1.72 0.19 0.18 0.67 4.75 0.03 1.66 0.20 14.28 <0.001
6. Motivation to find 4.61 3.97 4.43 4.62 3.40 0.07 0.51 0.48 2.20 0.14 14.40 <0.001 8.09 0.01
information
7. Willingness to buy 4.11 4.32 4.18 4.37 0.35 0.56 0.57 0.45 0.04 0.85 3.40 0.07 5.66 0.02

All constructs were measured on a 7-point Likert scale.

Reinforcement of positive comments (compared to negative Materials and Methods

comments) leads to: Design and Participants
There were two conditions with the same statements and
H1: More positive perceptions of organic food:
both positive and negative comments. In the reinforcement of
a) a higher perception of the benefits of organic food products positive comments condition, many likes (>300) were given
b) a higher perception of pesticide risks to positive statements regarding organic foods and few likes
(<20) to negative ones. In the negative condition, this pattern
H2: More positive feelings: was reversed: many likes were given to negative statements and
few likes to positive statements (see Figure 3). Participants were
a) more positive emotions randomly assigned to one of the two conditions.
b) less anxiety In study 2 participants were psychology students who
participated to earn course credits. All subjects gave online
H3: Higher behavioral intentions towards organic food: (digital) informed consent before starting the questionnaire. The
a) a higher motivation to find more information about protocol of this experimental study was approved by the Ethics
organic products Committee of the Faculty of Behavioral, Management and Social
b) a willingness to pay more for an organic apple compared sciences, University of Twente, the Netherlands. Participants
to a regular apple were requested to fill out an online questionnaire, which took

Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org 9 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30

Hilverda et al.
FIGURE 3 | Full Facebook page study 2 in English (translated from Dutch) Negative reinforcement condition is shown. The number of likes were reversed in the
positive condition.
them about 15 minutes in total. The final sample consisted
of 88 participants2 . This sample consisted of 25 males (28%)
and 63 females (72%) who were 21 years old on average. A
randomization check showed that there were no differences
between conditions with respect to gender and age.
Measures
Instruments were similar to those in study 1, except for a few
modifications3 With respect to behavior, willingness to pay was
used as a substitute for willingness to buy as how much money
a respondent is willing to pay is more closely linked to actual
behavior than buying intentions.
Perceptions
There were two perception measures. To measure benefit
perception (α = 0.86), participants filled out to what extent they
2A total of 88 participants (out of 145) correctly filled out the manipulation
check; they were aware that there was more support (number of likes) in favor
of eating organic foods in the positive condition, or against eating organic foods
in the negative condition. Only those participants who correctly answered the
manipulation check questions were included in the analyses.
3 All constructs in study 2 were measured on a 5-point Likert scale instead of a
7-point scale. As a replacement for health risk perception of eating organic food
we measured risk perception of pesticide use, which was found to be a central
association with respect to organic food (Hilverda et al., 2016). Attitude was
excluded to shorten the questionnaire.
Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org
Social Proof on Facebook
agreed that organic products have advantages (for example “more
nutritious”). The scale consisted of 12 items, all measured on
a five-point-Likert scale (1= strongly disagree to 5 = strongly
agree). To measure risk perception of pesticide use, participants
indicated on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1= strongly disagree
to 5 = strongly agree, to what extent they thought pesticides
were harmful to humans (3 items), animals (3 items), and the
environment (3 items). Reliability was good (α = 0.94).
Feelings
We measured positive emotions by asking to what extent they
experienced four positive states (happy, positive, satisfied, being
in a good mood; α = 0.94). Items were measured on a 5-
point scale from 1 = not at all to 5 = very much. Analogously,
we measured anxiety by asking the participants to what
extent they experienced negative emotions when thinking about
eating organic food (anxious, concerned, hopeless, pessimistic;
α = 0.80).
Behavioral predictors
Two predictors of behavior toward eating organic were included:
the motivation to find information and the willingness to pay.
Participants filled out, on a 5-point scale ranging from 1=
strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree, whether they wanted to
know more about organic food (4 items; α = 0.77). Participants
10 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30
Hilverda et al. Social Proof on Facebook

were then asked how much they were willing the pay for an
organic and a regular apple. The difference in eurocents in the
amount of money reported was used in the analysis.
Procedure
Participants were requested to fill out an online questionnaire
about organic food. After filling out an informed consent form
and their socio-demographics, participants viewed an image of a
Facebook page with several comments. They then answered an
open-ended question about their opinion of the information on
the Facebook page, and filled out the manipulation check. After
that, the dependent variables were measured. Participants were
debriefed by email afterwards.
Results Study 2
Means and Correlations
Please see Table 4 for means, standard deviations, reliabilities
and correlations of the constructs used. Risk perception was
relatively high. Benefit perception and positive emotions were
around the mid-point of the scale. They correlated positively
with each other and with the perceived risks of pesticide use.
Higher benefit perceptions were associated with more positive
emotions and higher risk perception of pesticide use. Anxiety
was low and did not correlate with any of the other dependent
variables. There was a positive correlation between motivation to
find information and positive emotions, showing that the more
positive emotions, the higher the motivation to find information.
On average, participants were willing to pay 19 cent more
for an organic apple than for a regular apple. This amount was
related to both risk perception of pesticide use and positive
emotions toward eating organic food: the higher the perceived
risks of pesticide use and the more positive emotions with respect
to eating organic, the higher the amount the participants were
willing to pay.
Hypotheses Testing
Separate ANOVA’s were conducted to test for differences between
conditions (Table 5). There were two significant effects and
one marginally significant result. Participants in the positive
condition scored marginally higher on the perceived risks of
pesticide use compared to the participants in the negative
condition, F (1, 85) = 2.97, p = 0.09, η2 = 0.03, which was in
line with H1b. In line with H2b, they also scored significantly
lower on anxiety compared to the participants in the negative
condition, F (1, 86) = 7.68, p = 0.01, η2 = 0.08. In the positive
condition, participants were willing to pay 25 cents more for
an organic apple compared to a regular apple, whereas this was
only 13 cents in the negative condition. The difference between
conditions was significant, F (1, 80) = 5,48, p = 0.02, η2 = 0.06, and
confirmed hypothesis H3b. There were no significant differences
between the conditions for benefit perception (H1a), positive
emotions (H2a), and the motivation to find information (H3a),
all p’s > 0.05.
DISCUSSION
The Internet is becoming one of the main sources of information.
Social media enables consumers to share their opinion with a
great number of other consumers or organizations. This led us
to examine to what extent the online opinions of others (i.e.,
social proof) on Facebook influences consumers’ perceptions,
feelings and behavior. Organic food was used as the topic of
the two experiments, because consumers have to make up their
minds regarding purchasing and consuming those products. In
this decision process, they might be inclined to follow the lead of
similar others. Our research was conducted in The Netherlands,
where already back in 2012 nearly 70% of the Dutch Internet
users used social media (CBS, 2013).
Key Findings
To get insight into the effects of explicit comments and
reinforcement in terms of likes two experimental studies were
conducted. In the first online experimental study we manipulated
both comment valance (positive vs. negative) as well as the
reinforcement of the comments (the number of likes: high vs.
low). Although previous research (e.g., Winterbottom et al., 2008;
Betsch et al., 2011; Kause et al., 2014; Seo et al., 2015) found
evidence that comment valence directly influenced consumer
responses, we did not find such a direct main effect of valence on
perceptions, emotions, or behavioral intentions. However, when
we included comment evaluation as a moderator in our analyses,
effects of comment valence did come to the fore. As expected,
the more respondents perceived the comments as valuable and
clear, the stronger the effect of comment valence on all dependent

TABLE 4 | Means, standard deviation, reliabilities, and correlations—study 2 (n = 82–88).

Constructs Mean sd alpha Correlations

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

1. Risk perception pesticide use 3.83 0.66 0.94 1

2. Benefit perception 2.93 0.59 0.86 0.39** 1
3. Anxiety 1.81 0.75 0.80 −0.12 −0.07 1
4. Positive emotions 2.85 1.03 0.94 0.33** 0.63** −0.05 1
5. Motivation to find information 3.85 0.71 0.77 0.10 0.11 −0.05 0.29** 1
6. Willingness to pay 0.19 0.24 n.a. 0.30** 0.43** −0.14 0.43 −0.04 1

All constructs were measured on a 5-point Likert scale. **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org 11 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30

Hilverda et al.
TABLE 5 | Differences between conditions in means of the constructs—study 2 (n = 82–88).
Constructs Positive condition mean (std)
1. Risk perception pesticide use 3.94 (0.64)
2. Benefit perception 2.98 (0.58)
3. Anxiety 1.61 (0.54)
4. Positive emotions 2.99 (0.99)
5. Motivation to find information 3.87 (0.79)
6. Willingness to pay 0.25 (0.29)
All constructs were measured on a 5-point Likert scale.
variables. These findings are in line with research by Slater and
Rouner (1996) who demonstrated the importance of message
evaluation as a moderator in a persuasion context. However, it
is important to note that based on the effect size, this multivariate
effect can be characterized as small to medium-sized (Hedrick
et al., 1993).
In the first study, results also indicated that the interaction
between valence and reinforcement via the number of likes was
not significant, indicating that the effect of comment valence was
not influenced by the number of likes. Overall, reinforcement
via likes did not have any effect on the dependent variables.
This is in line with other research showing that the number
of likes of a comment did not influence consumers’ attitudes
(Peter et al., 2014; Winter et al., 2015). It is also consistent
with the exemplification theory (Zillmann, 2002), suggesting
that consumers are more easily influenced by comments than
likes, because comments are perceived as concrete examples or
opinions. One might argue that the number of likes becomes
more relevant when consumers process information in a heuristic
way. For example, when under time pressure consumers might
not have enough cognitive resources to systematically review all
the comments and might therefore depend on the number of likes
as a heuristic cue for validation. Further research is needed to
investigate this and examine how information processing styles
influence the effects of subtle cues such as likes.
Taken together, study 1 showed that online social proof in
the form of comment valence can be effective when consumers
perceive the comments as valuable and clear. Reinforcement via
the number of likes, which can be viewed as a more implicit
form of online social proof, did not seem to have an effect on
consumers’ attitudes.
Study 2 was conducted to get insight into the effect of the
number of likes when consumers are confronted with both
positive and negative comments at the same time. We compared a
positive condition in which the positive comments received many
more likes than the negative comments (>300 vs. <20) with a
negative condition in which these numbers were reversed. In this
more inconclusive but also more realistic situation (Lee et al.,
2008), we found that subtle cues of social proof, i.e. the number
of likes, did have an effect on consumers’ reactions (e.g., Jin et al.,
2015) regarding organic food.
We found an effect of likes on risk perception of pesticide
use (marginal), negative emotions, and willingness to pay.
Consumers in the positive condition were willing to pay 25 cent
Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org
Social Proof on Facebook
Negative condition mean (std) F-value Sig 2-tailed
3.70 (0.67) 2.97 0.09
2.88 (0.60) 0.56 0.46
2.04 (0.90) 7.68 0.01
2.68 (1.06) 1.99 0.16
3.83 (0.62) 0.09 0.77
0.13 (0.15) 5.48 0.02
more on average for an organic apple compared to a non-organic
apple. This difference was only 13 cents in the negative condition.
These results imply that subtle cues of social proof can influence
perceptions, emotions, and behavioral intentions. It is assumed
that consumers need additional information to base their opinion
on and that they start looking at implicit types of social proof,
such as likes. This is consistent with research by Amblee and Bui
(2011) in relation to online reviews of short e-books: Consumers
switched their attention to author ratings when there were no
reviews available.
No significant effects of the number of likes were found
regarding benefit perception, positive emotions, and the
motivation to find information. One possible explanation for
the non-significant effects of our manipulations for some of
the dependent variables could be that our research sample
already had stable, rather positive attitudes toward organic food
products. The principle of social proof has been proven to work
especially well in ambiguous situations (Cialdini, 2001). This
might be less applicable to the subject of organic food.
Limitations and Future Research
It is uncertain to what extent our results are generalizable to other
issues about which consumers have to form an opinion. Further
research is needed to gain more insight in how consumers are
influenced by comments and likes on Facebook about other
products than organic foods.
In addition, it is unclear to what extent our results are
generalizable in terms of age and SES of the population. As
young people are often more engaged with social media (e.g.,
Kuttschreuter et al., 2014), it can be argued that Facebook
comments and likes might influence them even more strongly.
As both experiments used different samples with respect to age,
we maintain however that the effects of social proof are present
for a wider range in age. Concerning SES, SES-effects seem to be
of lesser importance in the Netherlands than in the USA and/or
other countries as differences in income are smaller and organic
food is widely available in regular supermarkets.
It is also unclear whether the usage of a fictitious Facebook
page might be considered as a limitation of our study design.
This methodological approach was needed to examine the
“pure” effects of comments and likes, while keeping all other
variables constant. To avoid ethical issues, participants in study
1 could contact the helpdesk of the research agency for questions
and debriefing during the entire data collection period and
12 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30
Hilverda et al.
participants in study 2 were debriefed about the origin of the
Facebook page afterwards. Previous research indicated that using
imaginary scenarios is a valid method to examine the effects of
real crises (Theofilou et al., 2011), and that effects are comparable
or more dominant in real life settings compared to fictitious ones.
This implies that our findings do not result from the use of a
fictitious Facebook page with fictitious comments instead of a
real page with real comments; in real life the effects might even
be stronger. To ensure our Facebook comments were realistic,
we pretested them in study 1 and selected the ones that the
participants considered most realistic. Future research is needed,
however, to study to what extent our results are generalizable to
real life settings, i.e., when using a non-fictitious Facebook page.
An interesting question that remains unanswered is how
different information sources on Facebook would have impacted
consumers’ reactions. Study 1 showed that the way in which the
Facebook comments are perceived is an important moderator
in the relationship between comment valence and consumers’
reactions to the topic. Previous research has demonstrated the
importance of source credibility (Slater and Rouner, 1996), also
with respect to consumers’ reactions on Facebook (Seo et al.,
2015). Consumers might respond differently when information
comes from trusted sources, such as friends and family members,
compared to unknown others.
As is common in social psychological experimental studies,
only participants who correctly filled out the manipulation
checks were included in the analyses, resulting in a smaller
sample size. In study 1, up to 97% of the participants correctly
identified the valence of the comments. However, only about half
of the sample (52%) correctly identified the number of likes. This
implies that participants possibly paid more attention to the post
and comments, while ignoring the number of likes. This is in
line with the idea that likes are an implicit form of social proof.
In study 1, the number of likes could have been perceived as
irrelevant, because all the comments carried the same positive
or negative message. Another explanation of the high dropout
rate in study 1 could be that the participant’s perceptions of the
magnitude of the number of likes did not match our intended
manipulation. Specifically, some participants in the conditions
with a low number of likes perceived the number of likes to
be high. It is likely that participants used their own Facebook
experience as a reference point instead of the reference frame
with which we provided them.
In study 2, when valence was mixed, one might expect that
subtle cues in terms of the number of likes should have been more
easily noted. This was however not the case as still about 50% of
the sample in study 2 failed to correctly answer the manipulation
REFERENCES
Amblee, N., and Bui, T. (2011). Harnessing the influence of social proof
in online shopping: the effect of electronic word of mouth on sales
of digital microproducts. Int. J. Electronic Commerce 16, 91–114.
doi: 10.2753/JEC1086-4415160205
Asghar, H. M. (2015). Measuring information seeking through facebook: scale
development and initial evidence of information seeking in facebook scale
(ISFS). Comput. Hum. Behav. 52, 259–270. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.005
Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org
Social Proof on Facebook
check question. The question is whether consumers simply do
not pay attention to the number of likes, perceive them as
irrelevant or are unaware of these cues. Future research might
want to include eye-tracking to disentangle these processes.
Practical Implications and Conclusion
Together, the two studies conducted showed that social
media information, such as comments and likes on Facebook,
does influence consumers’ attitudes, feelings and behavioral
intentions. These effects are especially present when consumers
perceive the explicit social proof as clear and useful, leading
to more positive attitudes following positive social proof and
more negative attitudes when receiving negative social proof.
Study 2 showed that the likes are influential when consumers
watch a Facebook page with mixed valence statements. The
results of these two studies indicate that it might be useful for
communicators and authorities to communicate with consumers
by using social media, for example Twitter or Facebook, to
inform them about the risks of a positively evaluated topic and
to respond to consumer comments (Veil et al., 2011). Being
visible on social media might help to build trust and gain a
good reputation. When using social media to communicate with
consumers one needs to be aware that consumers might also
influence each other by responding to the information both in
the form of posted comments as well as in the form of giving
“a like” at a comment. To avoid misunderstandings, it would be
useful for communicators to participate in online conversations
themselves, on Facebook and possibly also in chatrooms. In
this way, consumers can exchange information on social media
guided by a professional, who could use this as an opportunity to
correct factual errors.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
FH performed the two studies as part of her PhD-project. The
studies were planned in consultation with MK and EG. FH
performed statistical analyses on both samples, interpreted data,
drafted the manuscript and acted as corresponding author. MK
supervised development of work, helped in data interpretation,
manuscript evaluation, and edit the manuscript. EG provided
a critical overview of the project and edit the manuscript. All
authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank the Netherlands Food and Consumer
Product Safety Authority for funding this study.
Basilisco, R., and Cha, K. J. (2015). Uses and gratification motivation for
using facebook and the impact of facebook usage on social capital and
life satisfaction among Filipino users. Intl. J. Softw. Eng. Appl. 9, 181–194.
doi: 10.14257/ijseia.2015.9.4.19
Betsch, C., Ulshöfer, C., Renkewitz, F., and Betsch, T. (2011). The influence of
narrative v. statistical information on perceiving vaccination risks. Med. Decis.
Making 31, 742–753. doi: 10.1177/0272989X11400419
Bionext (2017). Feiten en Cijfers. Available online at: https://bionext.nl/feiten-
cijfers
13 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30
Hilverda et al.
Bredahl, L. (1999). Consumers’ cognitions with regard to genetically modified
foods. results of a qualitative study in four countries. Appetite 33, 343–360.
doi: 10.1006/appe.1999.0267
Cheung, C. M. K., Chiu, P.-Y., and Lee, M. K. O. (2011). Online social
networks: why do students use facebook? Comput. Hum. Behav. 27, 1337–1343.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.028
CBS (2013). Bevolkingstrend 2013: Gebruik en Gebruikers van Sociale Media. Den
Haag/Heerlen: v.d. Bighelaar, S. & Akkermans, M. G.
Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Influence: Science and Practice. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Dutta-Bergman, M. J. (2004). Primary sources of health information: comparisons
in the domain of health attitudes, health cognitions, and health behaviors.
Health Commun. 16, 273–288. doi: 10.1207/S15327027HC1603_1
FoodHolland (2016). Dossier Biologische Voeding. Available online at: http://www.
foodholland.nl/dossiers/biofood/home.html
Galvez-Rodriguez, M. D. M., Caba-Perez, C., and López-Godoy, M. (2016). Drivers
of twitter as a strategic communication tool for non-profit organisations.
Internet Res. 26, 1052–1071. doi: 10.1108/IntR-07-2014-0188
Giraud, G. (2002). “Organic and origin-labeled food products in Europe: Labels
for consumers or from producers,” in Ecolabels and the Greening of the Food
Market (Boston, MA: Tufts University), 41–49.
Giustini, D. (2006). How web 2.0 is changing medicine. Br. Med. J. 333, 1283–1284.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.39062.555405.80
Grankvist, G., and Biel, A. (2001). The importance of beliefs and purchase criteria
in the choice of eco-labeled food products. J. Environ. Psychol. 21, 405–410.
doi: 10.1006/jevp.2001.0234
Grankvist, G., and Biel, A. (2007). Predictors of purchase of eco-
labelled food products: a panel study. Food Qual. Prefer. 18, 701–708.
doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2006.11.002
Hammitt, J. K. (1990). Risk perceptions and food choice: an exploratory analysis
of organic-versus conventional-produce buyers. Risk Anal. 10, 367–374.
doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1990.tb00519.x
Hay, J. (1989). The consumer’s perspective on organic foods. Can. Inst. Food
Sci.Technol. J. 22, 95–99. doi: 10.1016/S0315-5463(89)70322-9
Hedrick, T. E., Bickman, L., and Rog, D. J. (1993). Applied Research Design: A
Practical Guide. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Hilverda, F., Jurgens, M., and Kuttschreuter, M. (2016). Word associations
with ‘organic’: what do consumers think of? Br. Food J. 118, 2931–2948.
doi: 10.1108/BFJ-05-2016-0229
Hilverda, F., Kuttschreuter, M., and Giebels, E. (2017). Social media mediated
interaction with peers, experts and anonymous authors: conversation partner
and message framing effects on risk perception and sense-making of organic
food. Food Qual. Prefer. 56, 107–118. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.09.003
Horst, M., Kuttschreuter, M., and Gutteling, J. M. (2007). Perceived usefulness,
personal experiences, risk perception and trust as determinants of adoption
of e-government services in The Netherlands. Comput. Hum. Behav. 23,
1838–1852. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2005.11.003
Hughner, R. S., McDonagh, P., Prothero, A., Shultz, C. J., and Stanton, J. (2007).
Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people
purchase organic food. J. Consum. Behav. 6, 94–110. doi: 10.1002/cb.210
Jacob, C., Mathiasen, L., and Powell, D. (2010). Designing effective
messages for microbial food safety hazards. Food Control 21, 1–6.
doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2009.04.011
Jin, S. V., Phua, J., and Lee, K. M. (2015). Telling stories about breastfeeding
through Facebook: the impact of user-generated content (UGC)
on pro-breastfeeding attitudes. Comput. Hum. Behav. 46, 6–17.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.046
Kause, A., Moussaid, M., Gaissmaier, W., and Galesic, M. (2014). When peers
overrule probabilities: the interplay between narratives, uncertainty and risk
perception in online environments. Paper presented at the 23rd SRA-E
Conference (Istanbul).
Kim, A. J., and Johnson, K. K. (2016). Power of consumers using social
media: Examining the influences of brand-related user-generated content on
Facebook. Comput. Hum. Behav. 58, 98–108. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.047
Kirschner, P. A. (2015). Facebook as learning platform: argumentation
superhighway or dead-end street? Comput. Hum. Behav. 53, 621–625.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.011
Kuttschreuter, M., Rutsaert, P., Hilverda, F., Regan, Á., Barnett, J., and Verbeke,
W. (2014). Seeking information about food-related risks: the contribution
Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org
Social Proof on Facebook
of social media. Food Qual. Prefer. 37, 10–18. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.
04.006
Lee, E. J., and Shin, S. Y. (2014). When do consumers buy online product reviews?
Effects of review quality, product type, and reviewer’s photo. Comput. Hum.
Behav. 31, 356–366. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.050
Lee, J., Park, D. H., and Han, I. (2008). The effect of negative online consumer
reviews on product attitude: an information processing view. Electron.
Commer. Res. Appl. 7, 341–352. doi: 10.1016/j.elerap.2007.05.004
Lee, K., Lee, B., and Oh, W. (2015). Thumbs up, sales up? The contingent effect
of facebook likes on sales performance in social commerce. J. Manage Inform.
Syst. 32, 109–143. doi: 10.1080/07421222.2015.1138372
Makatouni, A. (2002). What motivates consumers to buy organic food in the UK?
Br. Food J. 104, 345–352. doi: 10.1108/00070700210425769
Muscanell, N. L., Guadagno, R. E., and Murphy, S. (2014). Weapons of influence
misused: a social influence analysis of why people fall prey to internet scams.
Soc. Pers. Psychol. Compass 8, 388–396. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12115
Muturi, N. W., Kidd, T., Khan, T., Kattelmann, K., Zies, S., Lindshield, E., et al.
(2016). An examination of factors associated with self-efficacy for food choice
and healthy eating among low-income adolescents in three US states. Front.
Commun. 1:6. doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2016.00006
Okdie, B. M., Guadagno, R. E., Petrova, P. K., and Shreves, W. B. (2013).
Social influence available at online: a tale of gender differences in the
effectiveness of authority cues. Int. J. Interact. Commun. Syst. Technol. 3, 20–31.
doi: 10.4018/ijicst.2013010102
Osgood, C. E., P. H., and Tannenbaum, and, G. J., Suci (1957). The Measurement
of Meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Peter, C., Rossmann, C., and Keyling, T. (2014). Exemplification 2.0. J. Media
Psychol. 26, 19–28. doi: 10.1027/1864-1105/a000103
Redmond, E. C., and Griffith, C. J. (2006). Assessment of consumer food safety
education provided by local authorities in the UK. Br. Food J. 108, 732–752.
doi: 10.1108/00070700610688377
Roitner-Schobesberger, B., Darnhofer, I., Somsook, S., and Vogl, C. R. (2008).
Consumer perceptions of organic foods in Bangkok, Thailand. Food Policy 33,
112–121. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.09.004
Rozin, P., Spranca, M., Krieger, Z., Neuhaus, R., Surillo, D., Swerdlin, A.,
et al. (2004). Preference for natural: instrumental and ideational/moral
motivations, and the contrast between foods and medicines. Appetite 43,
147–154. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2004.03.005
Rutsaert, P., Pieniak, Z., Regan, Á., McConnon, Á., Kuttschreuter, M., Lores,
M., et al. (2014). Social media as a useful tool in food risk and benefit
communication? A strategic orientation approach. Food Policy 46, 84–93.
doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.02.003
Rutsaert, P., Pieniak, Z., Regan, Á., McConnon, Á., and Verbeke, W.
(2013a). Consumer interest in receiving information through social
media about the risks of pesticide residues. Food Control 34, 386–392.
doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2013.04.030
Rutsaert, P., Regan, Á., Pieniak, Z., McConnon, Á., Moss, A., Wall, P., et al.
(2013b). The use of social media in food risk and benefit communication.
Trends Food Sci. Technol. 30, 84–91. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2012.10.006
Santoro, E., Castelnuovo, G., Zoppis, I., Mauri, G., and Sicurello, F. (2015). Social
media and mobile applications in chronic disease prevention and management.
Front. Psychol. 6:567. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00567
Schifferstein, H. N. J., and Ophuis, P. (1998). Health-related determinants of
organic food consumption in the Netherlands. Food Qual. Prefer. 9, 119–133.
doi: 10.1016/S0950-3293(97)00044-X
Seo, S., Almanza, B., Miao, L., and Behnke, C. (2015). The effect of social media
comments on consumers’ responses to food safety information. J. Foodservice
Business Res. 18, 111–131. doi: 10.1080/15378020.2015.1029384
Shafie, F. A., and Rennie, D. (2012). “Consumer perceptions towards organic
food,” in Proceedings of the 1st National Conference on Environment-Behaviour
Studies, Vol. 49, eds M. Y. Abbas and A. F. I. Bajunid (Amsterdam: Elsevier
Science Bv), 360–367.
Shao, G. (2009). Understanding the appeal of user-generated media:
a uses and gratification perspective. Internet Res. 19, 7–25.
doi: 10.1108/10662240910927795
Shi, R., Messaris, P., and Cappella, J. N. (2014). Effects of online comments on
smokers’ perception of antismoking public service announcements. J. Comput.
Mediat. Commun. 19, 975–990. doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12057
14 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30
Hilverda et al.
Slater, M. D., and Rouner, D. (1996). How message evaluation and source attributes
may influence credibility assessment and belief change. J. Mass Commun. Q. 73,
974–991. doi: 10.1177/107769909607300415
Theofilou, A. E., Vassilikopoulou, A., and Lepetsos, A. (2011). “Methodological
considerations in crisis management research: fictitious scenarios vs.
real crises,” in 2011 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
(Cambridge, UK).
Tian, Y., and Robinson, J. D. (2008). Media use and health information seeking:
an empirical test of complementarity theory. Health Commun. 23, 184–190.
doi: 10.1080/10410230801968260
Veil, S. R., Buehner, T., and Palenchar, M. J. (2011). A work-in-
process literature review: incorporating social media in risk and
crisis communication. J. Contingencies Crisis Manage. 19, 110–122.
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5973.2011.00639.x
Vermeulen, I. E., and Seegers, D. (2009). Tried and tested: the impact of
online hotel reviews on consumer consideration. Tour. Manage. 30, 123–127.
doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2008.04.008
Walther, J. B., DeAndrea, D., Kim, J., and Anthony, J. C. (2010). The
influence of online comments on perceptions of antimarijuana public
service announcements on YouTube. Hum. Commun. Res. 36, 469–492.
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01384.x
Williams, P. R., and Hammitt, J. K. (2001). Perceived risks of conventional and
organic produce: pesticides, pathogens, and natural toxins. Risk Anal. 21,
319–330. doi: 10.1111/0272-4332.212114
Frontiers in Communication | www.frontiersin.org
Social Proof on Facebook
Winter, S., Brückner, C., and Krämer, N. C. (2015). They came, they liked, they
commented: social influence on facebook news channels. Cyberpsychol. Behav.
Soc. Netw. 18, 431–436. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2015.0005
Winterbottom, A., Bekker, H. L., Conner, M., and Mooney, A. (2008). Does
narrative information bias individual’s decision making? A systematic review.
Soc. Sci. Med. 67, 2079–2088. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.037
Zillmann, D. (2002). “Exemplification theory of media influence,” in Media Effects:
Advances in Theory and Research, eds J. Bryant and D. Zillmann (Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.), 19–41.
Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was
conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The reviewer IN and handling editor declared their shared affiliation at time
of review.
Copyright © 2018 Hilverda, Kuttschreuter and Giebels. This is an open-access article
distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the
original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original
publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.
No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these
terms.
15 August 2018 | Volume 3 | Article 30